True, but aren't they claiming that it will cut fuel consumption by 20%?
That pays for an awful lot of infrastructure.
General Aviation Thread
- Thread starter gf0012-aust
- Start date
That pays for an awful lot of infrastructure.
Ananda
The Bunker Group
Still there are several other wing design project including Airbus Laminar Wing program that also promise more economical fuel consumption. Even if the other more conventional design only provide 10% saving then 20% saving (if proven) from this blended wing design, but provide no changes on Airport infrastructure and passenger Management, then it will be hard to sell for this blended wing design.
Anyway:
Boeing 737 Max test flight lands at Seattle's Boe…:
This video being claim as first flight of MAX by Boeing with new software and other changes being done. However this is not yet FAA sanction test if my understanding correct.
It will be interesting, but will the airport facilities have to change that much if at all? Evacuation proceedures may have to change, but could have say 5 - 8 doors & evac slides per side depending upon the the size and pax capacity of the BWB. I think pax won't really mind the windows loss that much when you consider that today the seating arrangement in the wide bodies. Could always use cameras and LCD video screens to real time screen the outside view on the bulkheads and deckheads.
I agree Airbus misread the changing market with the A380, but Boeing has too with failing to replace the B757 and B737.
Speaking of Boeing, it failed to receive any orders in January 2020 for any new aircraft and only delivered 13 jets, whilst Airbus receievd 274 orders for commercial aircraft and delivered 31 aircraft. In an all-time low, Boeing wins zero orders and delivers just 13 jets in January
They would be great military transports, A2A refuellers, AEW&C, as well as heavy bombers, etc.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Although a 20% fuel saving will excite airlines, the evacuation issue and possible customer reluctance to an essentially windowless aircraft will quench their excitement IMO.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
You may be right about the windows not being an issue for most passengers but I still think the evacuation problem is significant. Not sure how the fuel tanks would be configured but I think a lot of passengers would be located above them. WRT to Boeing, they didn’t make a marketing mistake like Airbus did with the A380 IMHO. When the duopoly was faced with the perceived threat of the C-Series, both companies had significant problems with on going programs, especially Boeing’s Dreamliner. Both went with “neos ” instead of clean sheet designs and Airbus had a better platform for upgrading. It appears Boeing resisted a clean sheet design for the 757 due to financial reasons, another result of bean counters calling the shots from Chicago.
Ananda
The Bunker Group
As John said, both Airbus and Boeing goes the path of stretching capabilities of their existing design. It just 737 as older design has been recycled two times already (the Classic and NG) after the original. Thus Boeing stretch their luck too much.
But I do agree, Boeing miss read market when they terminate 757.
As for this blended wing design, if not mistaken on Boeing assessment, was 60% of the fuselage will be blended with wing, thus evacuation for passenger will relied on smaller section of fuselage. Compared to current design where evacuation can be done on doors throughout most of fuselage.
If not mistaken that one of the reason why Boeing thing this design more suitable for freighter and passenger carrier.
I agree with you that they can design some more novelty evacuation routes from the blended wing area, but I guess it will add the development costs. Which in turn has to beared by the Airlines whom will bought them.
Airbus it self like Boeing has several designs they are preparing for future Aircraft. Still compared to Airbus, Boeing is more conservative actually on their design. Guess at this moment they just try to get the reaction of the market.
Last edited:
Apparently Boeing has found another software bug on the B737-8MAX. Boeing found another software bug on the 737 Max
Sandhi Yudha
Well-Known Member
In my opinion its better if Boeing restarts production of the 737NG series. Everyone has more trust in the NG than those creepy Maxes.
On the other hand it seems there are around 400 (!) undelivered 737 Maxes, i can not imagine that Boeing just throw them away, but i also dont know how costly it is to convert these Maxes to NGs.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
MAX was needed to compete against the latest versions of Airbus’s A320neo family as the NG wasn’t cutting it anymore. Boeing will have to make the MAX right and start a new clean sheet design, a tough road given their questionable financial situation. Airlines that have ordered the MAX are probably all going to fly them. Future orders for the MAX will be less than expected. As for a NG restart, bad image for Boeing, probably too expensive, and would likely see the FAA giving it a new hard look prior to certification. More importantly, airlines have been there, done that.
Boeing should never have gone for the Max. It was a stretch too far for the 737. They should have developed a new single aisle aircraft, maybe backed Bombardier instead of trying to kill them & turned out something a bit bigger than the 737 which the C series could complement at the lower end. Instead, I think they've played to Airbus's strengths. Arrogance & complacency, perhaps.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Agree, but you must consider Boeing’s situation at the time of the C-Series threat. The Dreamliner was struggling big time. They didn’t really have the engineering resources to do a clean sheet design back then (or Airbus for that matter). As for working with Bombardier, hard to say. After pi$$ing a $hitload of money into their De Havilland acquisition, they literally gave it away to Bombardier just as the regional turboprop market took off. Then there is the Chicago headquarters calling the shots, bean counters and the senior execs concentrating on short term share value...who needs engineers and QA expertise? As the IOTUS says, so sad.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
The US is considering restrictions on jet engine and avionics products to China. Reverse engineering is a concern but in my opinion why help a potentially aggressive new player into the market, especially when your own manufacturer of commercial jets is on the ropes? Aerospace is America’s most important export product where it still retains leadership. Giving stuff to China is a sure way to end American dominance in aviation.
U.S. weighs blocking GE engine sales for China's new airplane: sources
U.S. weighs blocking GE engine sales for China's new airplane: sources
Ananda
The Bunker Group
Something that bit bigger than 737 ? Well they have it..it's call 757, and guess what..that's what Delta, United and American wants..The European also want that..even the Asia-Pacific market also looking on that capacities.
Why? Because the fastest growing order recently in Airbus stable (according on latest order not the cumulative numbers)
is not A330 Neo, or A350 or even A320 Neo..but A321Neo/LR/XLR where Airlines looking on capacities and capabilities that 757 left.
Building 757 Neo or NG or can call it 757MAX if they want, will not going to put Boeing to this present condition since putting larger Fan engine will not going to push 757 design as being put to 737 design.
They can put lighter building materials, newer wing design, and those larger Fan engine on 757 design. 757 design has many aerospace analysts pointed out having flexibilities to make 3 version, the short ones for capacity of 170-200, medium 210-230 and 240-270 on the longest one..
It will take the MAX 8, 9, and 10 capabilities with longer range than 737 MAX can. Thus can take the trend of medium-long range point to point market that's seems what the market/Airlines wants.
Yes they should end 737 design. They kill wrong Airliners.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Clearly having the “MAX” designation on any new product is an oxymoron guarantying failure. Airbus’s 321 series is a here and pretty much a ready solution to what many airlines want for a 757 replacement. Boeing has no choice but to consider a clean sheet design. IMO the design has to be fairly radical and offer huge benefits above and beyond what the A321XLR currently has. I think the product has to be a post A321XLR replacement.
Yep, I agree going with a 757NG / Neo etc., is a no brainer and as you suggest in 3 different variants, short / medium / long. As long as they don't be stupid and try to chuck something like the GE90 on it, they should do alright. Modern materials would definitely lighten the airframe and new engine technologies would reduce the fuel burn.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Apparently Bombardier’s big sell off is complete with the pending sale of it’s rail operations. Previously it was announced it sold off its remaining stake in the A220. Its regional Jet operation was sold a couple of years ago thus leaving its business jet portfolio as the last piece. Realistically it has been the only viable operation Bombardier ever had. Hope they don’t stuff it up. I wonder how Airbus will endure its A220 Québec operation once the Alabama plant is in full swing.
Bombardier declares its turnaround over, a shadow of its former self
Bombardier declares its turnaround over, a shadow of its former self
If that's the case, is that Canadian aircraft manufacturing gone?
Ananda
The Bunker Group
My guess will depend on how well A220 sell globally. Right now if base on their sell, they are doing well in North America and Europe, but still miniscule sell in Asia Pacific.
Airbus open A320 facility in China for Chinese market, same approach seems doing in A220 facility in US. If A220 did not getting enough traction in Asia-Pacific market then perhaps Airbus will have to consider the merit on two manufacturing facilities.
Mind you, I do believe the valuation of A220 shares that Airbus procured from Bombardier also include the valuation of Quebec's facilities. Besides, with Quebec government also still own minority shares in A220, it will not easy for Airbus to leave Quebec facilities. As minority Quebec Government will probably have negotiate hard since beginning of Airbus involvement in A220 program to protect Quebec's aerospace job.
Last edited:
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
No , Viking manufactures the Otter and CL-515 water bomber and the Q-Series continues via the same holding company that controls Viking. Bombardier will continue with business jets. As Ananda mentions above, the Québec government will fight hard to keep Airbus operations alive.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Hard to say how well the A220 will sell in Asia. The Chinese and Japanese both will offer sort of similar products. The A220 now has Airbus’s marketing/supply chain in its favour which is IMHO responsible for all the recent orders.